Healthcare IT NewsHealthcare IT News
TwitterFacebookLinkedInHealthcareITNews International
  • Home
  • Topics
    • ARRA/Stimulus
    • Business Intelligence
    • Claims Processing
    • Data Warehousing
    • EDIS
    • Election 2012
    • Electronic Health Records
    • Enterprise Content Management
    • Enterprise Resource Planning
    • ePrescribing
    • Financial/Revenue Cycle Management
    • Health Information Exchange (HIE)
    • ICD-10
    • Mobile/Wireless
    • Network Infrastructure
    • Policy and Legislation
    • Privacy and Security
    • Quality and Safety
    • RIS and PACS
    • RTLS
    • Telehealth
    • Workforce Management
  • Issues
    • January 2012
    • December 2011
    • November 2011
    • October 2011
    • September 2011
    • August 2011
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • On Demand Webinars
  • White Papers
  • Blog
  • Events
  • HIMSS JobMine
  • RSS
  • Press Releases
  • Slideshows
  • Videos
  • Podcasts
  • Supplements
  • Survey Analyses
  • Newsletters
  • Advertise
  • Login
  • Register
  • SUBSCRIBE
    • Newspaper
    • Email Newsletter
Home » News
Receive News By Email

  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • RSS Icon
  

Consumers weigh in on top 10 meaningful use arguments

March 08, 2010 | Molly Merrill, Associate Editor

Suggested Content

  • Community college training of HIT professionals questioned
  • Beacon Communities snag more money for IT
  • After Kolodner, then what?
  • LookAhead
  • 'Obamacare' a lightning rod, but what about health IT?
  • Mostashari: Meaningful use to reach new heights
  • Venture Fair experts: The timing is right for mHealth entrepreneurs
  • HIT Policy Committee recommends delay for Stage 2 MU
  • A new chief for ONC

WASHINGTON – A Washington-based advocacy group has collected consumer and employer perspectives on the top 10 arguments concerning meaningful use.  And with only a week left before the public comment period on meaningful use comes to a close, the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology is urging the public to weigh in with their own thoughts.

While the healthcare provider community's concerns with the government's proposed definition of "meaningful use" of healthcare IT are well-documented in the media, less attention has been paid to the consumer and employer perspectives, said officials of the Consumer Partnership for eHealth or CPeH, a coalition led by the National Partnership for Women and Families.

CPeH is an effort to engage a diverse group of national consumer, patient and labor organizations in the healthcare IT policy debate. The partnership has also launched an online community to promote open communication among members of the group.

CPeH has collected the following responses regarding the most common arguments heard about meaningful use:

1. The proposed meaningful use definition is asking too much, too soon for 2011. It should be scaled back so more providers can focus on simple adoption.

Consumer response: The proposed criteria for meaningful use in 2011 don't ask for capabilities that are beyond those of today's certified EHRs. IT also offers flexibility by allowing providers to choose their starting payment year. The incentives are voluntary; they are not an entitlement and there is no requirement to participate. But for those choosing to leverage public dollars we must ensure the investment pays off in the form of better care.

2. Providers, especially hospitals, need much greater flexibility in the sequencing of the goals and objectives for meaningful use.

Consumer response: As long as the criteria in the both Privacy and Security and Patient Engagement are mandatory, we agree with the HIT Policy Committee's recommendations for additional flexibility by allowing some criteria in some categories to be deferred, while making certain criteria mandatory. Patient engagement criteria require changes that will make the most difference to patients and their families and are not likely to occur without clear incentives for providers.

3. There are too many quality measures proposed, and many criteria require manual recording.

Consumer response: We agree. However, some quality measures must be retained – both because quality measurement is required by the HITECH Act, and because measurably improving quality is the ultimate meaningful use of healthcare IT. We believe it is important to focus on a core set of exemplary measures that demonstrate providers are using key functions of the EHR, can be collected easily as a byproduct normal workflows, and that show progress in improving health outcomes for patients. Meaningful use criteria should not include measures that necessitate manual recording.

4. Small primary care practices have fewer resources to implement meaningful use as defined in the proposed rule. Therefore those intended to benefit most from these incentives, won't.

Consumer response:
  With federal funds available to help small practices cover the cost of IT systems and with aid from Regional Extension Centers there is greater support for smaller practices. Congress also ensured that eligible Medicaid providers and hospitals can receive funding in their first year for adopting, implementing, or upgrading certified EHR technology so they are able to meaningfully use the technology in their second payment year.

5.The timeline to meet the proposed measures is too aggressive, given that we don't have a single national infrastructure or set of national standards.

Consumer response:
The requirements for year one of the proposed rule are based on the capabilities and standards of today's certified EHR technology. The only area of ambiguity is data exchange, and CMS is proposing that providers perform one test of their ability to send data to another authorized provider. We believe it is essential to maintain this basic criterion, although we also believe that the data exchange should have to be successful.

  • 1
  • 2
  • next ›
  • last »
Related Topics:
  • information technology
  • Washington

Reader Comments (5)Login to Post a Comment

susiemas says: Fairness to all medical professionals
March 15, 2010 | 10:01AM GMT

While the push for implementation of technology is widespread, and many if not most being allowed to benefit slightly for their attempt and usage with the incentive of stimulus monies, our profession (independent pathology group)qualifies for none. Shouldn't the meaningful use criteria been written to include all who have a need to be involved? In order for our private practice to maintain our clients, we are forced to implement the technology and utilize it so they can get their lions share of the stimulus!

pgflrob says: Its the technology
March 15, 2010 | 7:16AM GMT

The problem with EHRs is the technology. It is simply not mature. The User Interfaces are driven by archaic mouse and keyboard user interfaces. This is because all the developers have been sucked into the Microsoft camp.

EHR developers need to break out and come up with a different way of thinking about how providers and consumers interact with the information.

All current EHR implementations will be obsolete in 3-5 years.

ARRA is a huge waste of money and effort. We should be encouraging out of the box thinking and a lot more test cases and demonstration projects vs. mass deployment of end of life cycle technology.

gregt422 says: The technology does exsist
March 15, 2010 | 10:38AM GMT

The technology needed to meet meaningful use measures and objectives does exist. Granted not in the way it is being proposed by "so called" experts and old established I.T. companies, but there are many small companies that have developed advanced business models and workflows using multiple technologies I.E. smart cards, web portals and biometrics etc. These small, veteran, minority and women owned companies are hotbeds of innovation because they have to be. Why would a client choose a small company over a well known big company unless the small company was offering something an IBM or Cerner does not or cannot? These companies are not being given a seat at the table. Grants and funding proposals are being offered daily by the Government and other agencies but applicants are only given a few months to write proposals. This is an expensive and daunting task for a company with few employees and resources but larger companies can afford a permanent grant writing staff. Why not release these RFPs four months or even six months before the submission date?

Small I.T. firms must be allowed their rightful place at the table.

paulroemer says: Of cabbages—and kings— And
March 10, 2010 | 4:23PM GMT

Of cabbages—and kings—

And why the sea is boiling hot—and whether pigs have wings. Lewis Carroll, Out of the Looking Glass. It is a nonsense story, one which cannot be argued.

As are Electronic Health Records (EHR) and Meaningful Use (MU)—at least to date. Measured against any reasonable set of standards, except on a one-off basis, the national rollouts of EHR and MU have failed. I expect it will be even more so next year.
You, the public, have the right to comment, and we have the right to tell you why your comments hold no water. I think it is the inverse of you have the right to remain silent, you just don’t have the ability. I am writing about the ONC and the bone they tossed calling for public comment. They are required to provide for public comment in order to remove the N and the P from the NPRM.

Who among us believes the rule making will markedly shift direction as a result of any of the public comments? That is unfortunate for if they were to shift direction they might find a direction. We don’t know where we are going, but we are making good time getting there. Figures suggest a failure rate of EHR implementations of somewhere between fifty and seventy percent. As healthcare IT resources become scarcer, I expect the failure rate to increase. As providers rush into EHR without a detailed strategy simply to grab the incentive money, there will be more expensive failures. More failed EHRs is not a way to measure progress.
The current cover of Government Health HIT magazine depicts a foot race to meet MU. There is no race if there are no entrants. There may be more people on the cover than will actually qualify for the race, even fewer who will reach the end.

We would be better served if the plan for national rollout of EHR were not written on an Etch-A-Sketch. We don’t know what will be included in Stages 2 and 3 of MU. When will fifty percent of providers have an EHR, not just the software, but one that actually boosts productivity? How about 70% or 80%? Ten years? I ask the same question of the Health Information Exchanges (HIEs). Without unilateral adoption there will be large gaps. Will the national network function with these gaps? To what extent? Will the records only make it part of the way from Patient A to Doctor X?

Having not solved the EHR program on their own, and having no viable plan, the government laid the burden of making EHR successful on the backs of the providers. The government tries to offset the burden by offering financial gratuities—and penalties—to the providers. Not exactly the second coming of the Three Wise Men. Trying to hit the ONC’s targets is a little like playing the confidence game, the shell game. Under which shell will providers find the rules, the plan?
What to do?

It is easy to criticize. Permit me to offer a few suggestions. To the hospitals, if you are not well along the EHR path, do not make a difficult effort more difficult by chasing Gossamer incentive dollars. Stick to your plan. You have multiple failure points which three years from now will make chasing those dollars look like a pipe dream. The failure points? Your plan, the implementation, meeting the MU requirements, passing the MU audit. It does not look very promising to me.

To those hospitals which haven’t started their EHR initiative, or are less than halfway through the passing the failure points, don’t cancel your summer vacation. You have a lot more time to get it right then you have to get it wrong. Pay no attention to the man—or woman; even I can have a moment—handing out the Monopoly money. You won’t be receiving any. From where I sit, that is good news. It will cost a lot more to perform disaster recovery on a poor implementation than the funds you would have received by meeting MU.

How long does a hospital spend planning to build a new hospital wing? For large hospitals, the cost of your EHR will likely exceed the cost of the new wing. Plan accordingly. Invest six or nine months building a plan that might succeed.

For medium and small practices and solo providers you have nothing to lose by waiting a year months other than the resource problem. By then you will find very viable ASP and shrink-wrapped solutions.
Those who follow my blog, healthcareitstrategy.com, know I don’t write to garner favorable replies from those who think they’ve already got it figured out. I write for those who because of EHR have difficulty sleeping. Thanks for reading. As always, I appreciate your comments and disagreements.

darrelldk says: CPeH is dishonest about healthcare
March 09, 2010 | 3:54PM GMT

Consumer Partnership for eHealth is one reason interoperable health records don’t stand a chance in dentistry. CPeH is an advocacy group built on strategic, self-serving lies. Does CPeH also assure consumers that they deserve all these impossible demands for a lower price?

Quit setting consumers up for disappointment, CPeH. You and your lousy ethics are never welcome in my practice.

D. Kellus Pruitt DDS

Most Popular

Latest Headlines
Most Popular
  • 10 most outlandish kinds of ICD-10 codes
  • 5 stages of EHR maturity and patient collaboration
  • 5 simple ways to realize ROI from your EHR
  • 'Obamacare' a lightning rod, but what about health IT?
  • Remote health monitoring pegged at 3 million users by 2016
  • H.I.T. Men and Women to pick up awards at HIMSS12
  • University challenge targets NCDs with mHealth and social media
  • Indiana health exchange taps AT&T to scale up
  • eHealth Initiative releases recommendations for accountable care
  • One surgeon's take on need for culture change in medicine

WEBINARS AND WHITE PAPERS

  • WHITE PAPERS
    Driving Meaningful Use of Enterprise Content Management
  • ON DEMAND WEBINARS
    The Value of Document and Content Management in Healthcare Transformation
  • WHITE PAPERS
    Sharp HealthCare: Growing Content Management into an Enterprise Strategy
  • WHITE PAPERS
    Winning the EHR Battle with Enterprise Content Management
  • WHITE PAPERS
    The Christ Hospital Case Study: Improving Operations and Ensuring the Best Possible Patient Care with ECM
More Resources
Syndicate content

HIMSS JOBMINE

  • Director, Sales - HIMSS - Arlington, VA
  • Program Analyst - Mathematica Policy Research - Princeton, NJ
  • Oracle Implementation Analyst - Virginia Mason Medical Center - Seattle, WA
  • Web and Custom Development Manager - Virginia Mason Medical Center - Seattle, Washington
  • Epic Analyst/Builder - Vitalize Consulting Solutions - Nationwide
more jobs

Marketplace

Follow Healthcare IT News on TwitterFan Healthcare IT News on FacebookJoin Healthcare IT News on LinkedInRSS Subscriptions
Digital EditionBlogEvents
JobsMobile SiteMobile App
 
Healthcare Finance News Government Health IT EHRWatch Healthcare Payer News HITECHWatch ICD10Watch mHIMSS PhysBizTech NHINWatch
©2012 MedTech Media Healthcare IT News is a publication of MedTech Media
Subscribe Advertise About Us Privacy Policy